A discovery by a Harvard researcher may shed light on a controversial aspect of the life of Jesus Christ.

Harvard Divinity School professor Karen L. King says she has found an ancient papyrus fragment from the fourth century that, when translated, appears to indicate that Jesus was married.

The text from the New Testament is being dubbed "The Gospel of Jesus' Wife." The part of it that's drawing attention says, "Jesus said to them, 'my wife'" in the Coptic language. The text, which is printed on papyrus the size of a business card, has not been chemically tested to verify its dating, but King and other scholars have said they are confident it is a genuine artifact.

"Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was not married, even though no reliable historical evidence exists to support that claim," King said at a conference in Rome on Tuesday. "This new gospel doesn’t prove that Jesus was married, but it tells us that the whole question only came up as part of vociferous debates about sexuality and marriage. From the very beginning, Christians disagreed about whether it was better not to marry, but it was over a century after Jesus’s death before they began appealing to Jesus’ marital status to support their positions."

King, who focuses on Coptic literature, Gnosticism and women in the Bible, has published on the Gospel of Judas and the Gospel of Mary of Magdala. She presented her research Tuesday evening in Rome, where scholars are gathered for the International Congress of Coptic Studies.

The idea that Jesus was unmarried and chaste is largely accepted by Christian denominations and forms the backbone of the practice of celibacy among Roman Catholic priests.

"Beyond internal Catholic Church politics, a married Jesus invites a reconsideration of orthodox teachings about gender and sex," said journalist and author Michael D'Antonio, who writes about the Catholic Church, in a blog on The Huffington Post. "If Jesus had a wife, then there is nothing extra Christian about male privilege, nothing spiritually dangerous about the sexuality of women, and no reason for anyone to deny himself or herself a sexual identity."

The quote about Jesus' wife is part of a description of a conversation between Jesus and his disciples. In the conversation, Jesus talks about his mother twice and speaks once about his wife. One of them is identified as "Mary." His disciples discuss whether Mary is worthy of being part of their community, to which Jesus replies, “she will able to be my disciple.”

The fragment has eight incomplete lines of writing on one side and is badly damaged on the other side, with only three faded words and a few letters of ink that are visible, even with the use of infrared photography and computer-aided enhancement.

The private owner of the papyrus first approached King in 2010. King said she didn't believe the document was authentic, but the owner persisted. She then asked the owner to bring the papyrus to Harvard, where she became convinced it was a genuine early Christian text fragment. Along with Princeton University professor Anne Marie Luijendijk and Roger Bagnall, director of the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, King claims to have confirmed the document is real. The document's owner has not been named and King said he does not want to be identified.

It's unclear when the text was initially discovered. The owner who showed it to King found it in 1997 in a collection of papyri that he acquired from the previous owner, who was German. The papyri included a handwritten German description that had the name of a now-deceased professor of Egyptology in Berlin who called the fragment a "sole example" of a document that claims Jesus was married.

The scholars believe the text is from Egyptian Christians before the year 400, as it is written in the language used at that time. Since writing appears on both sides of the fragment, scholars believe it came from a codex, a kind of book, and not a scroll. The scholars also believe the document is a translation of an earlier one that was likely written in Greek.

King notes in her research that the idea of Jesus' celibacy hasn't always existed, and that early Christians debated whether they should marry or practice celibacy. It was not until around the year 200 that Christian followers began to say Jesus was unmarried, according to a record King cites from Clement of Alexandria. In his writing, Clement -- an early theologian -- said that marriage was a fornication put in place by the devil, and that people should emulate Jesus by not marrying.

One or two decades later, Tertullian of Carthage in North Africa declared that Jesus was "entirely unmarried" and told Christians to remain single. But Tertullian did not come out against sex altogether and allowed couples to get married one time, denouncing divorce and remarriage as overindulgent. A century later, the First Epistle of Paul to Timothy said in the New Testament that people who forbid marriage are going by the "doctrines of demons," but did not include anything about Jesus being married in order to make the point.

The point of view that ultimately became dominant was that celibacy is preferred as a high sexual virtue among Christians, but that marriage is needed for the sake of reproduction.

"The discovery of this new gospel," King said, "offers an occasion to rethink what we thought we knew by asking what role claims about Jesus's marital status played historically in early Christian controversies over marriage, celibacy, and family. Christian tradition preserved only those voices that claimed Jesus never married. The Gospel of Jesus's Wife now shows that some Christians thought otherwise."

The life of historical Jesus is often a matter of controversy, and this is not the first time it's been proposed that Jesus was married. Most recently, Dan Brown's novel "The Da Vinci Code" depicted Jesus as being married to Mary Magdalene. The book was published as fiction, but nonetheless attracted loud criticism from Vatican officials.

UPDATE: 4:28 p.m. -- Speaking on a conference call Tuesday from Rome, King said that some people who have read about the discovery have asked if the papyrus fragment was describing Jesus as being married to the Christian faith, not to a woman.

"One cannot overrule that it might be him saying 'my wife as a church,' but in the context where he's talking about 'my mother' and 'my wife' and talking about 'my disciple,' the one thing you would not say is that the church would be 'my disciple.'"

Even before King's discovery, there has been speculation that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. "I do not think Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene," King clarified Tuesday, adding, "whether he was or was not married ... I really think the tradition is silent and we don't know."

King also said that a professor who saw her report asked her if the text on the papyrus could have been a homily and not a gospel, an idea she said she had not considered.

King added that she hopes the discovery will diminish the view outside of academic circles that the debate over marriage and sexuality in the early church is "fixed and over." In current church debates over issues such as same-sex marriage and marriage among Catholic priests, "having more voices from the early church and a better, more accurate version of early Christianity is more helpful," she said.

Dont know---but one thing, if Jesus was married, then there is no reason why Catholic priests cannot get married as well, and nuns for that matter How can one help you with marital issues, if they themselves are not, or were not married?

Dont know---but one thing, if Jesus was married, then there is no reason why Catholic priests cannot get married as well, and nuns for that matter How can one help you with marital issues, if they themselves are not, or were not married?

Dont know---but one thing, if Jesus was married, then there is no reason why Catholic priests cannot get married as well, and nuns for that matter How can one help you with marital issues, if they themselves are not, or were not married?

jesus was twice divorced when he died. He had twelve kids that followed him around

when god incarnated he took it seriously: he fornicated, got drunk, masturbated, had sex with trannies, etc etc

Hard to imagine, they would have nailed his 5 ft body to cross well before he became a "public nuisance and rebel rouser".

Many different texts from that time talk about those issues, and "eunuchs"---born ones or made ones. Many for man's pleasure. Apparently in Islam, there are three types--ones with no balls, ones with no balls and bat, and ones with no bat, but balls. All three were made.Thus, this gets into a discussion of why in Islam would these men need to be made like that and for what "purposes"....

Seems like some folk have been doing a good "tuck job" when it comes to denial.

Hard to imagine, they would have nailed his 5 ft body to cross well before he became a "public nuisance and rebel rouser".

Many different texts from that time talk about those issues, and "eunuchs"---born ones or made ones. Many for man's pleasure. Apparently in Islam, there are three types--ones with no balls, ones with no balls and bat, and ones with no bat, but balls. All three were made.Thus, this gets into a discussion of why in Islam would these men need to be made like that and for what "purposes"....

Seems like some folk have been doing a good "tuck job" when it comes to denial.

well, he said that what if Jesus was married to a man, I said that due to the strictness of Judism of the time, that would be forbade, and he would have been strung up...Also, I mentioned that in the Arabic world, that there are apparently 3 diff types of "made" eunuchs---many of these were either made due to punishment, keeper of harems, or for man's pleasure, and I was alluding to some Islamic leaders denying that Homosexuality exists within the Arabic-Islamic world

**a few days ago, an old Vietnam vet asserted to me that the Spartan soldiers were all eunuchs, hence the eunuchs.

In his writing, Clement -- an early theologian -- said that marriage was a fornication put in place by the devil, and that people should emulate Jesus by not marrying.

lol.. that made me laugh.

The thing is, Jesus was a rabbi, and rabbis are to be examples for the community and being married was one of them... At 12 jewish boys would potentially marry and or become rabbis as they become men.

The church doctrine of celibacy is contrary to God's law and commandments. God created us male and female, to procreate on this earth, to find comfort in our spouses. Instead look at what priests have achieved, homosexuality and abuse of boys and girls... they are going against God's creation and order.

I always found this obsession of being against sexuality in christianity weird.

Only God knows in the end the truth in the matter. The church only has speculation and chose what to say, do to defend their own power and grasp over people. The same goes for the pauline teachings of the trinity

Quote

UPDATE: 4:28 p.m. -- Speaking on a conference call Tuesday from Rome, King said that some people who have read about the discovery have asked if the papyrus fragment was describing Jesus as being married to the Christian faith, not to a woman.

Without even seeing it or touching it... the church and christians are already conjecturing meanings that are not there to defend the trinity -_- As then they would have the problem of God has a wife now.

lol Unfortunately the qur'an and the bible are absolutely nothing alike.

The bible is many books intervowen in different languages, with different unknown authors, with different writings styles, even in the same books themselves different styles. It's quite evident even reading the translations that where Paul is ranting he is really ranting.

The qur'an is completely different to that of the hadith which are the sayings of Muhammad (pbuh) as well.

The qur'an is a very distinct piece of literature and literary arabic grammar, fusha arabic has been actually derived from the qur'an. No past or modern arabic literature can come close to it, that is why it says produce a surah like it or even a verse like it.

It is such an intricate piece of work, using very few words, tells so much, it has rhyme and beauty yet is not poetry as poetry usually is pretty meaningless especially in contrast to the arabic and how much information it delivers.

lol Unfortunately the qur'an and the bible are absolutely nothing alike.

The bible is many books intervowen in different languages, with different unknown authors, with different writings styles, even in the same books themselves different styles. It's quite evident even reading the translations that where Paul is ranting he is really ranting.

The qur'an is completely different to that of the hadith which are the sayings of Muhammad (pbuh) as well.

The qur'an is a very distinct piece of literature and literary arabic grammar, fusha arabic has been actually derived from the qur'an. No past or modern arabic literature can come close to it, that is why it says produce a surah like it or even a verse like it.

It is such an intricate piece of work, using very few words, tells so much, it has rhyme and beauty yet is not poetry as poetry usually is pretty meaningless especially in contrast to the arabic and how much information it delivers.

Anyhow

Of course the Koran is in one writing style, Mohammed wrote it when he was meditating in his cave. And yes he apparently couldn't read or write....apparently.

FYI, the quran was revealed over a period of 23 years. Each ayaht (verse) came at one time or another. In the end it was compiled as instructed how by Muhammad (pbuh) in what is the complete qur'an today.

Muhammad (pbuh) had tens of thousands of companions/witnesses to God's revelation. Many of them were memorizers of the qur'an. The best of them were responsible for preserving the qur'an and in Abu Bakr's time it was agreed to compile it all at once. Otherwise the qur'an was kept in memories of people, parchments, bones, sheep skin, etc...

Muhammad (pbuh) and late rhis companions just relayed the revelation of God word for word. And thankfully we have it today word for word. Unlike the bible and its many deriatives clearly meddled by human hands and not from God.

FYI, the quran was revealed over a period of 23 years. Each ayaht (verse) came at one time or another. In the end it was compiled as instructed how by Muhammad (pbuh) in what is the complete qur'an today.

Muhammad (pbuh) had tens of thousands of companions/witnesses to God's revelation. Many of them were memorizers of the qur'an. The best of them were responsible for preserving the qur'an and in Abu Bakr's time it was agreed to compile it all at once. Otherwise the qur'an was kept in memories of people, parchments, bones, sheep skin, etc...

Muhammad (pbuh) and late rhis companions just relayed the revelation of God word for word. And thankfully we have it today word for word. Unlike the bible and its many deriatives clearly meddled by human hands and not from God.

The bible is not God's word while the qur'an is God's word. People merely preserved it and transmitted it. Mind you we didn't have computers or microsoft word. Parchments, sheep skin, bones, etc... are ways people noted things down until paper was widespread by Muslims waaay later.